As I recall, circuit breakers aren't there to disconnect shorts. They're to disconnect based on excessive load. As it happens, when there is a short, it will frequently cause excessive load, but that's incidental.
– The Evil GreeboOct 7 '13 at 12:37

@TheEvilGreebo Yes, but isn't a short almost always the source of the excessive load? An appliance rarely decides to reduce its internal resistance unless circuits cross.
– bibOct 7 '13 at 13:20

5 Answers
5

In fact, this is often how subpanels are configured; the main panel has a breaker that feeds the subpanel, and the subpanel has individual circuits protected with their own breakers. The subpanel will have an amp rating. The minimum of the subpanel rating and the ampacity rating of the wire feeding the subpanel will dictate the appropriate breaker for the main panel.

Appliances that require their own local disconnects (such as air conditioners, water heaters, etc.) frequently use a small enclosure with space for just one circuit breaker. This could be a good option for whatever application you are thinking of.

As another example: Many workshop power strips have their own local circuit breaker, which is in series between the house's breaker (of course) and the load. These are often "fast-blow" breakers, designed to fire before the main breaker does and thus save you a trip to the basement.
– keshlamAug 21 '15 at 4:04

Most generator manual transfer switch-over panels require you to do just this. The wire coming out of the breaker and going to a load (normally) is disconnected and channeled over to a second panel with another breaker and then then the biter-end coming out of the second panel is tied back to the load. In short, two breakers in series.

Isn't that what he wants? A higher chance of shutdown (either or both would disable), just in case one breaker doesn't trip as fast as he would like.
– bibOct 7 '13 at 13:18

What he wants is merely a single-circuit subpanel -- and there's nothing in the NEC or any UL listing that forbids such; in fact, single circuit breakers in dedicated enclosures are standard catalog items.
– ThreePhaseEelMar 11 '15 at 2:22

There is no single panel that does this (+1). Unbeknownst, the OP is asking if they should install a sub panel for redundant safety.
– MazuraJan 22 '17 at 21:04

Two breakers in series would reduce the risk of one failing in a way that stays in a closed (conducting) position. But modern breakers today have an extreme low risk of this happening. If I were that paranoid, I'd put a breaker and a fuse in series. But I'm not.

Putting two breakers of same size and rating in series can be dangerous. manufacturers give the short circuit breaking current for ONE device.
Modern CB operated with the magnetic force generated during the short circuit. This magnetic repulsion of the contacts is linked to the energy generated during the short circuit. The breakers are designed to open according to this energy generated during the short circuit. the opening time and speed is defined according to this energy. If two breakers are in series it impossible to predicte the energy at the level of the two devices. The energy is distributed over the two devices. And the operation time and openning speed can be slower than with only one breaker. Putting two breaker of same size and same rating can be dangerous.

This is incorrect. Breakers are designed to have minimal load on the protected circuit, and to function under a variety of load conditions. If you had two breakers in series then one breaker wouldn't know that the other one was even present, and so would function just fine.
– Daniel GriscomMay 22 '16 at 15:58

Perhaps this answer is assuming two breakers feeding a circuit in parallel rather than in series as the OP is asking. That's the only part I can figure from the "energy distributed over the two devices".
– BMitch♦May 23 '16 at 12:30